P. v. Silveyra
Filed 7/11/06 P. v. Silveyra CA1/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ANTONIO F. SILVEYRA, Defendant and Appellant. | A112476 (Marin County Super. Ct. No. SC143914) |
INTRODUCTION
Appellant Silveyra appeals the trial court's upper term sentence of three years incarceration. Silveyra contends that factors in mitigation require the imposition of the middle term of two years. We hold the trial court acted within its discretion and hence affirm.
BACKGROUND
Silveyra was charged with: burglary of a vehicle (Pen. Code, § 459), receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)), false personating (Pen. Code, § 529, subd. (3)), receiving a stolen vehicle (Pen. Code, § 496d, subd. (a)), and giving false information to a police officer (Pen. Code, § 148.9, subd. (a)). Silveyra pled guilty to the charges of receiving a stolen vehicle and giving false information to a police officer. The other charges and a subsequent case were dismissed with Harvey waivers. (People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.)
At sentencing, the prosecution recommended sentencing to the middle term of two years imprisonment. The prosecutor argued that probation was not appropriate because this arrest was Silveyra's fifth arrest in a year and because he was arrested for a new offense only five days after being released on his own recognizance for the charge at issue.
Silveyra presented mitigating evidence to support a middle term sentence including the fact of his drug addiction, his work history, details of family strife that he alleged exacerbated his drug problem, and the financial impact on his family if he were sentenced to a long prison term. Silveyra also presented evidence of his involvement in drug rehabilitation and parenting education classes while in jail.
After considering all evidence, including the probation report, the trial court sentenced Silveyra to the upper term of three years in state prison. The trial court cited Silveyra's repetition of offenses and criminal history as reasons supporting the aggravated sentence.
DISCUSSION
The trial court's discretion in sentencing â€
